Latitudinarianism

Clearly the unity of welldoers involves some kind of agreement, and equally clearly uniformity in the sense of 100% agreement on all questions is impossible, so it would be silly for me to accuse you of not seeking unity, and equally silly for you to accuse me of seeking uniformity. The question is how far we should expect agreement to reach.

According to the Bible a welldoer never functions separately, but always in union with other welldoers. The most comprehensive exposition in the Bible of the background, content and implications of the gospel, after 11 chapters of background and content, springs with its great therefore (Romans 12.1) into: what? How to coexist with wrongdoers? No, the fellowship of God's people!

And even those sections of the Bible which may seem to focus on the individual are in fact firmly set against the background of the covenant which God has made with a nation, with Israel in the Tanakh and with Christ's people in the New Testament.

Welldoers are one body from the outset. This view could be called Organicism. But most Christianoids adhere to Individualism. They think as if welldoers were like the mutually independent humans of the prevalent modern attitude, who come together for certain purposes but basically live separate lives.

The exact boundary between cases where it can fairly be expected that welldoers will reach agreement and those where it cannot must be judged case by case. But the teaching of the New Testament, which I have just described, is clear, and demands unity on matters like politics, art and education.

Back to Humanity's Unchanging Task (3).